Jun 5, 2011
commented on Another Country in the City
It's Mudede, so I'm sure that his choice of phrasing about using a culture was deliberate. But I'm not on board. Culture is like a virus. As such, culture is the agent and you are the host in which it which it acts. It forms or transforms you, but you do not use it.
At most, perhaps, we enact a culture. We perform culture. We transmit a culture to the next generation: socialization is the inoculation of offspring with the agent (virus) of culture.
Mudede might perhaps argue that he has performed a survey of world cultures and that he chooses the culture and paradigm and tradition from which he engages life -- that he "uses" a culture of his choosing. But I assert that he was infected by the cultures of his upbringing, and that any additional cultural assimilations are just a superbug -- more powerful, perhaps, for their recombinant nature. But culture is the agent that uses you to its own end (reproduction and transmission of itself.) Not the other way around.
Sep 7, 2010
commented on SL Letter of the Day: The Last Word On Porn
Dear Dan, I think you might have some hope in demographics with this battle, too. You know how you're waiting for all the homophobes to die off, b/c the next generations are not polarized by "gay" stuff? Well, I think the great porn polarization can be blamed on 2nd Wave feminism -- 2nd wavers were opposed, and raised their daughters to view porn as mysogenistic, objectifying, whatever. It's a tragedy for both sexes, and sadly the camps who were thus indoctrinated will probably never find peace with porn. But Third wavers ... they're raising porn-friendly babes. So your mailbag will only be filled with this stale topic for another ... few decades?
Aug 12, 2010
commented on People Who Do That Shouldn't Be Allowed Around Children
The fact that McCollom is a douchebag is a given.
More troubling is the permission Dan grants with the statment, "I wouldn't work with someone that I felt was abusing his children."
Dan is condoning moral outrage as an acceptable basis for making a hiring/employment decision. I'm sure that hiring managers who are morally outraged by a gay who has icky, icky gay sex feel the same way when engaging in discriminatory hiring practices.
Granted, Dan is describing a criminal act. Obvs he would have a moral and civic duty to report his suspicions to the proper channels to investigate and prosecute.
But I'm wary of the permission that Dan grants for making hiring decisions based "issues that call for a zero-tolerance stance." Whose zero-tolerance stance? If it's criminal, then it belongs in the criminal system and not in the HR decision. If it's not criminal, then someone's "moral outrage" is my "fun on a friday night."
(Besides, did you see the "required viewing" Colbert clip that Dan posted re Newt Gingrich/popular survey of relative ranking of acts as moral/immoral? In a survey, Americans rank the death penalty as more moral than gambling as more moral than cloning as more moral than polygamy ...? )
Sorry, Dan. Until you post a pic of how straight _your_ "moral compass" is, I'm not gonna give you a pass on advocating moral outrage as a legitimate hiring criteria.
Even if McCollum is a douche.
Jul 20, 2010
commented on SL Letter of the Day: Barely Conscious
Sorry, Dan, but nothing is wrong with BARE.
For this situation, my other favorite "Dan" -- Dan Ariely -- actually has a more useful answer and exploration of the issue at hand. Ariely is a behavioral exonomist and author of Predictably Irrational. Chapter 5 deals directly with the situation that BARE describes.
Ariely collaborated with close friend George Loewenstein, a professor of economics and psychology at Carnegie Mellon University, to test the influence of arousal on decision making in high-emotion situations. Ariely and Loewenstein chose to test the effects of sexual arousal on decision-making in college-aged men at University of California, Berkeley. By using computers to stimulate sexual arousal, they determined that in a stimulated state, the young men were more likely to undergo an action that they would not normally consider. Using the data, Ariely argues that other high-emotion situations such as anger, frustration, and hunger have the potential to trigger similar effects on decision-making. In such situations our behavior is fully controlled by emotions. We are not the people we thought we were. No matter how much experience we have we make irrational decisions every time we are under the influence of arousal.
...(From a NYT review) What the reasoning self should do, he [Ariely] says, is set up guardrails to manage things during those many, many moments when reason is not in charge.
Shaming BARE and accusing him of being a spineless POS is useless in terms of behavior modification. His actions are common, predictable, and expected, once you accept what "really" drives human motivation, rather than applying a lens of what we think people "should" do.
The way for BARE to do what he knows he should do in light of long-term consequesnces is for him to make the decisions/negotiations about condom use BEFORE his cock is presented with a raw hole.
And there are ways to make that sexy. Introducing a "Dom" flavor to his top-action is a great way to be able to set the rules and feel accountable to himself and partner for appropriately disciplining the bottom and making the bottom "obey."
May 15, 2010
commented on "Ex-Gay Freeze Tag"
Their words say that the "sin" of homosexuality is no greater than the sin of gossipping. But I have yet to see a church that has a special ministry to address the problem of gossip.
May 13, 2010
commented on Morning News: Violence, Opium, And Your Mother's Gluten Allergy
I tell people I have a "wheat allergy," but I don't. That's because Celiac disease is actually an auto-immune disease that is triggered by exposure to gluten. When I go to a restaurant, I describe it as an "allergy," because people are famailiar with allergies, and I've long hoped restauranteurs will take it as seriously as anything leading to anaphylaxis. A tenth of a teaspoon of gluten (crumbs) is enough to trigger cellular damage in my GI tract. Please don't let the good science in this article (and my own lies about an "allergy") make you less attentive to my legitimate needs and requests. (I'm biopsy-confirmed and have pics of the damage gluten does to my intestines.) Also, I tip exceptionally well when I think restaurants are taking my needs seriously.
May 6, 2010
commented on The Main Criticism Against Mudede
I'm a former hater who was assigned the task of conducting a discourse analysis in order to complete my graduate degree. All of a sudden I've been wanting to have a sit-down with Mudede at a coffee shop. "Please! Explain to me Foucault's subject position of the patient!"